Save Our Sidmouth


by 1 Comment

Clone Town Britain – Sidmouth Survey

View the Clone Town Britain, Sidmouth survey, May 2012, by Marianne Rixson

with postscript below:

Marianne writes:

“It’s almost six months since this nef (New Economics Forum) survey, Clone Town Britain, was done for Sidmouth. Some shops have changed in the interim. Has Sidmouth grown ever closer to clone town status? Yet  I know some of the people I have worked with come from Exeter and Exmouth to shop because of our individual shops.

Exeter, of course, is a prime example of a shopping centre which has nothing but chain stores. In the main shopping street, can you name any shop which does not fall into this category (see reference to Exeter p.11, clone town report by nef)?”

‘Exeter, South West: The high street in Exeter, Devon, prides itself as ‘the heart of one of the West Country’s biggest and liveliest shopping centres…packed with many famous national names including Marks & Spencer, Laura Ashley, H & M, Dingles (House of Fraser), Next, Cargo Home Store, Boots, Country Casuals and Ann Harvey. Not surprisingly Exeter also takes the bottom score of the surveys received – a mere 6.9 out of 60. Amongst the shops counted on the high street, there was only one independent shop – the rest were chains. A broader range of independent shops can be found on side streets, however, but it was noted that few visitors or even locals find their way there.’

Marianne continues:

“Not only have most of the independent shops been driven off the high street, but Exeter is also bottom in terms of diversity of shop type, with only 10 out of 25 categories represented. Overall, there is little more than clothing retailers, a few electronics shops and some stationery or bookstores on the high street. Unsurprisingly, the rents on the high street are also extremely high. Information from the Exeter & District Consumer Group reveals that they rise upwards from around £30,000 a year, with the business rate adding at least another £120,000.

Nuff said, really!”


by Leave a comment

Knowle : Letter to ‘SAVE Britain’s Heritage’ from SOS

REPRODUCED WITH PERMISSION OF JEREMY WOODWARD, ( VISION GROUP FOR SIDMOUTH/ SOS):
Dear SAVE Britain’s Heritage,
You are aware of the attempts by East Devon District Council to pull down Sidmouth’s largest Victorian hotel, Knowle: you submitted a very powerful objection to their Outline Planning Application.
Meanwhile, EDDC have put together a new OPA and have extended the consultation period: http://www.eastdevon.gov.uk/communications_and_consultation.htm?newsid=722
I have been in touch with English Heritage, to whom I sent the application to List the building and grounds: I attach my original notes which accompanied the application.
This was subsequently rejected and I have since lodged an appeal, to both EH and the DCMS: I also attach this.
I asked EH for the correspondence between it and EDDC prior to the rejection of the listing application, which I have only just received. I would be grateful for any comments from SAVE with regard to the documents which I received from EH today and which I attach:
> 34821 Knowle Hotel. The 1947/50 Listing is not very specific. No notes are extant from this period apparently.
> Knowle e-mails. Page 7 reveals that current EDDC officer Claire Rodway in fact completed a dissertation on the Knowle Hotel, but that this has been deleted, together with any potentially significant information about the building.
> Photographs from East Devon. Whilst the camera never lies, the choice of some rather ugly pictures of corridors and messy corners is not very convincing; moreover, these were taken by EDDC officers whose perspective cannot be taken as impartial.
In the meantime, this case has generated enormous controversy. Private Eye has featured Knowle in its Nooks and Corners column, which I attach. This week the Daily Telegraph featured the larger Save Our Sidmouth campaign, of which Knowle is a central concern: https://saveoursidmouth.com/2012/10/23/save-our-sidmouth-reaches-the-daily-telegraph/; http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/hands-off-our-land/9625012/Sidmouth-mans-the-barricades.html. And in the local Sidmouth Herald, the local MP Hugo Swire has pledged to ask Minister Pickles to ‘call in’ the OPA should it be passed next month: http://sidmouthindependentnews.wordpress.com/2012/10/26/the-knowle-hugo-swire-is-neutral/.
In your objection to the OPA, you cited the absence of a proper Heritage Statement. EDDC have now commissioned and published a 12-page report:

http://planning.eastdevon.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=externalDocuments&keyVal=M95J5FGH01C00; http://planningapps.eastdevon.gov.uk/Planning/lg/GFPlanningDocuments.page. I have submitted a reply on behalf of both the Vision Group for Sidmouth and the SOS campaign, which I attach.

I would like to thank SAVE Britain’s Heritage for the interest you have taken in this case and would be grateful if you would be able to make any further comments.
With best regards,
Jeremy Woodward
Sidmouth


by Leave a comment

Critique of the Heritage Statement for the revised plans for the Knowle.

The analysis below was done by Jeremy Woodward, Secretary of Futures Forum, Vision Group for Sidmouth. It may prove helpful to SOS supporters for their written objections.

HERITAGE STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE – KNOWLE, SIDMOUTH

Notes

OUTLINE PLANNING APPLICATION: 12/1847/MOUT

http://planning.eastdevon.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?
http://planningapps.eastdevon.gov.uk/Planning/lg/GFPlanningDocuments.page

In their report on the heritage at Knowle, Kensington Taylor have chosen to interpret ‘heritage asset’ in the narrowest of terms, as simply those buildings listed by English Heritage within the setting of the Conservation Areas of Sidmouth.

KT devote most of their statement of 12 pages to an analysis of how the OPA will affect one fragment of the heritage on the site, namely the listed Summerhouse, which KT considers the only ‘heritage asset’ of any ‘significance’. As such, they have diminished the larger historical, architectural and artistic context, whilst diminishing all other heritage assets on the site.

The report claims that the buildings and grounds are ‘much altered’ and that ‘the setting of the listed Summerhouse is already much compromised and divorced from the original integrity of the extended grounds.’ This understanding of the setting is in much dispute, as has been made clear by the submissions from established bodies including the Devon Gardens Trust and SAVE Britain’s Heritage.

Firstly, it is clear that the arboreal heritage immediately surrounding the Summerhouse is of significance, with most of the specimen trees over fifty years of age; the substantial parkland and gardens in fact enjoy much of their ‘original integrity’, offering a setting both for the listed Summerhouse and the other heritage assets. And secondly, the façade of the original Knowle Hotel offers an imposing backdrop to the listed Summerhouse, whilst the palatial scale and volume of the Victorian structure cannot fail to impress when approaching from the views to the south.

It is very clear, however, that the only concern KH consider valid is the ‘immediate setting’ to the listed Summerhouse. The ‘formal terraced gardens’ will be ‘protected’ only in so far as they impinge upon this specific heritage asset and will, therefore, spared from the proposed ‘built development’. However, nowhere else in the report is concern or interest shown for the integrity of the ‘gardens’, whether the formal terracing which dominates the upper section or the current soft boundary planting in the lower parts.

Extraordinarily, KT actually propose that new ‘soft boundary planting’ would mean that ‘impact on views to the Summerhouse from the south will be minimized’, not considering that the raising of most of the formal terraced gardens and the wider setting will mean that the impact on views from any direction will be noticeably maximized.

The other ‘constraints’ which are ‘highlighted as significant’ are, again, simply those heritage assets which ‘need to be addressed’, and no more, in which case, KT refer only briefly to the ‘Lodge’ – although there are in fact two listed lodges to the Victorian Knowle Hotel – and the Grotto – which the report actually refers to as having been listed in 1951, the date when the Hotel itself was originally listed, the circumstances of which are currently being investigated.

The report closes with a cursory consideration of the adjacent Conservation Area. Because the trees ‘running alongside the eastern side of Station Road’ are not to be felled, it is considered that ‘views into and out of the Conservation Area will not therefore be affected’. And yet it is clear that the construction of the proposed care home on the current weekend tourist grasscrete car park, immediately adjacent to the Lodge and the exit to Station Road, would have considerable impact on ‘views into and out of the Conservation Area’.

This Heritage Statement is disappointing in its scope, in that KT refuse to stray beyond a myopic consideration of the history, architecture and artistry of the site. Its distorted perspective precludes a full appreciation of the heritage value and its limited parameters render it not only inadequate but call into question any conclusions reached, in which case this report cannot be accepted in its current form.

October 2012